Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Vintage, Modern, V & C Series, Signature & Special Editions

Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (Jangleman) » Tue Oct 29, 2019 4:25 am

Glad to help Keith, you are correct about the low and high e strings; they will take a little getting used to but after about 30 minutes playing my fingers/brain sussed it out. The fact is that this nut makes my 330/12 so playable. I recommend you think about the 12 saddle bridge too. As posted earlier the intonation is improved and the need for constant re-tuning just disappears. It is a pig to fit though, and you have to cut the saddles very close to the edges but it the effort is worth it. Plays like a 6 string now and sounds heavenly through my janglebox.
Let me know how you find playability with the new nut.

Jangleman
(Jangleman)
New member
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2018 11:05 am

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (thark) » Sun Nov 10, 2019 9:48 pm

I have ordered and received a Rickysounds wide 12-string nut to move the strings apart so that I can play my Rick more effectively. Thanks for the info, Jangleman. I must say that the service from Rickysounds is exceptional. *Very* fast shipping for a transatlantic/customs journey.

The nut is cut for string sizes from 10 to 42 but my (bloody expensive) Tomastik-Infeld strings go from 10 to 44. I believe that the only oversize strings in the set are the 6th and 5th fundamentals and all the rest are either the "correct" size or slightly smaller. Will these strings work ok with this nut? Anyone with any experience with this?

Cheers,

Keith
(thark)
New member
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:47 pm

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (pauleway) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:27 pm

It's just too bad that to make your Rickenbacker guitar playable you have to modify it and spend more money, and time installing a different nut for appropriate finger spacing, and a 12 saddle bridge for better intonation, on your brand new (and Expensive) Rickenbacker 12-string guitar.
You would think that after all these years, Rickenbacker would make their 12 sting guitars come standard with these parts (Including the wider neck on ALL their 12 string models), but their position has been that they are doing just fine, and " Don't fix it if it's Not Broken".

They have come out with the 660/12, and the 1993Plus, to their credit, but the majority of Ric lovers have gone through the process of modifying our beautiful Rickenbacker guitars, and finally just either selling them for a more playable guitar, or hanging them on the wall because they are so beautiful! JMHO!!!
(pauleway)
New member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:36 pm

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (Jangleman) » Tue Nov 12, 2019 6:57 am

Keith, I suggest you contact Robbie at Rickysounds re the low E and A gauges. He really knows his stuff with Rics and is very helpful, I had my gorgeous 2002 660/6 FG from him. My feeling is if the slots need anything it would only be a stroke of a nut file.

Paul, you are absolutely correct. I couldn't agree more with you re our our beautiful Rics. The thing is that all the extra cost and work is worth it, as the end result is a magnificent looking, fabulously sounding and now wonderfully playable instrument.

Cheers,

Jangleman
(Jangleman)
New member
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2018 11:05 am

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (pauleway) » Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:48 pm

The neck width on a 6-string Rickenbacker (360 - 330 - 620) is a fairly narrow width neck, and to add 6 more strings on the same width neck makes it really tight.
I'm sure that originally they did it this way to save money on re-tooling and it was a fairly new concept (and great one) at the time. But after all these years you would think that they would have fixed this problem with all of their 12-string models (I'm sure they had many complaints of this issue), and I know about the 660/12+1993Plus, but there are many beautiful Rickenbacker guitars sitting under beds because guys just gave up the fight to adjust to a hard to play guitar.(Not all - but a high % of us out there!)
Hopefully some day I will be able to buy my 360/12-wide neck to complete my Ric collection, but I'm not getting any younger, and I know I'm just spitting in the wind!! :roll:
(pauleway)
New member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:36 pm

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (steverok) » Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:24 pm

Spot on. Even the 6-strings are a little tight, compared to, say, a Fender. If Ric made the 330-12 and 360-12 with a wider fretboard, I would end up buying more Rics !
User avatar
(steverok)
Intermediate Member
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:16 pm
Location: Plantation, FL, USA

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (pauleway) » Thu Nov 14, 2019 3:13 pm

steverok wrote:Spot on. Even the 6-strings are a little tight, compared to, say, a Fender. If Ric made the 330-12 and 360-12 with a wider fretboard, I would end up buying more Rics !


Yeah - Probably 75% of Ric 12 string owners (and previous owners) would be buying their favorite Ric model if they came with the wider neck and 12 saddle bridge.
Hopefully with J. Hall retiring, they get someone in there with some fore-sight to update things for the future of the company. The guys who are big Beatles/Byrds/Animals/T.Petty fans that made the Rickenbacker so popular are getting old and the young guitar players not as interested in nostalgia as much as a more comfortable playing guitar!
(pauleway)
New member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:36 pm

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (collin) » Thu Nov 14, 2019 4:46 pm

pauleway wrote:
steverok wrote:Spot on. Even the 6-strings are a little tight, compared to, say, a Fender. If Ric made the 330-12 and 360-12 with a wider fretboard, I would end up buying more Rics !


Yeah - Probably 75% of Ric 12 string owners (and previous owners) would be buying their favorite Ric model if they came with the wider neck and 12 saddle bridge.


That’s a gross exaggeration, based on a small handful of opinions.

For decades, people have gotten along just fine with the standard Rick 12-string neck width (myself included) and only in the past decade has a vocal minority online complained about the specs. So RIC has offered the 660 and now 1993 Plus, yet people still complain. I don’t get it...

Remember, it was good enough for George Harrison, Pete Townshend, Roger McGuinn and countless others.

I’ll agree with others that the setup makes a huge difference, having strings spaced out as far as possible on the standard nut, and also grouping the strings closer together so it’s easier to finger each pair. Makes a drastic change, and is also similar to the specs on these guitars back in the 60s.
User avatar
(collin)
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6644
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Corona, CA, USA

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (pauleway) » Thu Nov 14, 2019 5:41 pm

That’s a gross exaggeration.
So RIC has offered the 660 and now 1993 Plus, yet people still complain. I don’t get it...

Remember, it was good enough for George Harrison, Pete Townshend, Roger McGuinn and countless others.

And is also similar to the specs on these guitars back in the 60s.[/quote]

I've read a few articles that George Harrison stopped playing his Ric because it was difficult to play, and Pete Townsend and Tom Petty both requested a wider neck when Rickenbacker ask them what they would like done (Petty 660/12 signature+1993Plus for Townsend).
I think I'm in the majority in saying that most Ric 12-string owners would prefer a wider neck. To their credit, they do offer the 660/12, and 1993Plus, (I own both) but if you want that sweet single bound 360/12 (McGuinn style) you're SOL! They should also put 12 saddle bits on all the 12's, that's a no brainer.
Make all the 12-sting models wide necks, and for the FEW old time players who prefer that really narrow neck, make it available on one of the models!!!
(pauleway)
New member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:36 pm

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (collin) » Sat Nov 16, 2019 3:26 am

It was surprising to me that Townshend wanted a wider neck because he practically invented some chord shapes soeicieallt because of the standard Rick neck size.

If a wide neck was really that critical to players, they’d sell a LOT more 660/12 and 1993 Plus than garden variety 330/360 12-string models, and that’s simply not the case.

I might be more into the idea of a wide neck 12-string if the neck profile wasn’t also thick, if it was wide and flat that might work better. Still, I have no issues with a standard width neck that’s set up properly.
User avatar
(collin)
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6644
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Corona, CA, USA

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (jps) » Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:33 pm

collin wrote:It was surprising to me that Townshend wanted a wider neck because he practically invented some chord shapes soeicieallt because of the standard Rick neck size.

What is this word: soeicieallt :shock:


collin wrote:I might be more into the idea of a wide neck 12-string if the neck profile wasn’t also thick, if it was wide and flat that might work better. Still, I have no issues with a standard width neck that’s set up properly.

Thinner/flatter necks work great for a 12 string guitar; my Yamamoto MS-12 is very comfy to play. Part of that may be down to the asymmetrical neck profile, too. It has a 1 7/8" nut width, and is a multiscale fingerboard which can in some respects, make the neck feel even wider depending on where one is playing on it (mostly, first position, and above the 12th fret).
User avatar
(jps)
RRF Consultant
 
Posts: 36380
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:00 am
Location: Not of this Earth

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (collin) » Sun Nov 17, 2019 12:29 pm

jps wrote:
collin wrote:It was surprising to me that Townshend wanted a wider neck because he practically invented some chord shapes soeicieallt because of the standard Rick neck size.

What is this word: soeicieallt :shock:


You know what needs to be wider? The damn iPhone!

“Specifically”
User avatar
(collin)
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6644
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: Corona, CA, USA

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (jps) » Sun Nov 17, 2019 12:46 pm

:lol: Phones are creating a whole new language; maybe that's the Esperanto language that's had been bantered around decades ago, we're finally getting it, bit by bit. :mrgreen:
User avatar
(jps)
RRF Consultant
 
Posts: 36380
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:00 am
Location: Not of this Earth

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (steverok) » Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:49 am

pauleway wrote: Yeah - Probably 75% of Ric 12 string owners (and previous owners) would be buying their favorite Ric model if they came with the wider neck and 12 saddle bridge.!


Actually, I am not all that on-board with the 12-saddle bridge. I got one for my 360-12, but felt the guitar lost tone with it, in terms of definition and sustain, so I switched it back.
User avatar
(steverok)
Intermediate Member
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:16 pm
Location: Plantation, FL, USA

Re: Why No 360/12 Wide neck - like the 1993/Plus

Postby (pauleway) » Tue Nov 19, 2019 5:10 pm

steverok wrote:
pauleway wrote: Yeah - Probably 75% of Ric 12 string owners (and previous owners) would be buying their favorite Ric model if they came with the wider neck and 12 saddle bridge.!


Actually, I am not all that on-board with the 12-saddle bridge. I got one for my 360-12, but felt the guitar lost tone with it, in terms of definition and sustain, so I switched it back.



:shock: That would put you into the 25% bracket!! :o
(pauleway)
New member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:36 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Rickenbacker Guitars: by John Simmons

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest